The effects of inhaled house dust mite on airway barrier function and sensitivity to inhaled methacholine in mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asthma is functionally characterized by increased airway sensitivity and reactivity. Multiple mechanisms are believed to underlie these functional disorders, including impairment of airway wall barrier function. One proposed mechanism of impaired barrier function is through the direct consequence of proteolytic properties of inhaled allergens, including house dust mite (HDM). Here, we have observed the direct effects of HDM on airway barrier function and response to nebulized or intravenous methacholine. HDM naïve BALB/c mice were anesthetized, exposed to intranasal or intratracheal HDM (15 or 100 μg), and allowed to recover for 30 min or 2 h before methacholine challenge. A separate group of mice was exposed to intratracheal poly-L-lysine (PLL; 100 μg) for a duration of 30 min. This group served as a positive control for the presence of impaired barrier function and airway hypersensitivity. Negative control mice received saline challenges. Outcomes included assessment of lung mechanics in response to nebulized or intravenous methacholine as well as clearance of intratracheally instilled technetium-labeled ((99m)Tc) DTPA to evaluate airway epithelial barrier function. We found that PLL produced a leftward shift in the dose-response curve following nebulized but not intravenous methacholine challenge. This was associated with a significantly faster clearance of (99m)Tc-DTPA, indicating impairment in airway barrier function. However, HDM exposure did not produce changes in these outcomes when compared with saline-exposed mice. These findings suggest that direct impact on airway barrier function does not appear to be a mechanism by which HDM produces altered airway sensitivity in airway disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".